• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Antimicrobial wipes can spread pathogens after first use

mixin

Well-known member
Antimicrobial wipes can spread pathogens after first use

A new study by a team of researchers at the Welsh School of Pharmacy, Cardiff University, Wales, UK, has found that antimicrobial-containing wipes currently used to decontaminate surfaces in hospitals can spread pathogens after first use.
The research highlights concerns as to the suitability of the wipes currently being deployed and the importance of a routine surveillance program in reducing risks of infection to patients.

The research, conducted by Dr. Gareth Williams at the Welsh School of Pharmacy, Cardiff University, Wales, UK, and supported by a grant from the Wales Office of research and Development for Health and Social Care (WORD), is being presented June 3, 2008 at the 108th General Meeting of the American Society for Microbiology (ASM) in Boston.

Antimicrobial-containing wipes are increasingly being used to decontaminate surfaces in hospitals. Many studies have reported on the ability of Staphylococcus aureus to contaminate and persist in the hospital environment. Germicides are commonly used on hard surfaces in hospitals to kill bacteria. The research posed the question - 'Are we confident that these organisms are susceptible to the germicides used in our hospitals"'

The study identified the need for a test which could thoroughly examine the ability of commonly used wipes to disinfect surfaces. As such, a robust 3-step protocol to assess the ability of wipes to remove, kill and prevent the transfer of bacteria between surfaces was subsequently developed. Using the 3-step method the study examined the ability of several commercially available wipes to disinfect surfaces contaminated with Staphylococcus aureus, including Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

The results showed that some wipes can remove higher numbers of bacteria from surfaces than others. However, the wipes tested were unable to kill the bacteria that they removed. As a result, they transferred high numbers of bacteria to other surfaces. Our work suggests that if these wipes encounter highly contaminated surfaces in practice, the survival of bacteria on the wipe material could lead to the cross-contamination of other surfaces if used more than once.

http://www.asm.org/
http://www.news-medical.net/?id=38902
 
Study finds cleansers remove germs but do not kill them on surfaces

Study finds cleansers remove germs but do not kill them on surfaces

Welsh study finds cleansers remove germs but do not kill them on surfaces

TUESDAY, June 3 (HealthDay News) -- Using an antibacterial wipe more than once can spread germs, according to a new study.

Some tested antimicrobial-containing wipes, which are gaining popularity in hospitals as a way to decontaminate hard surfaces, can remove greater numbers of bacteria from surfaces than others, but none killed the bacteria they captured. If used more than once, much of the bacteria could just be transferred onto other surfaces, the study said.

The findings, by researchers at the Welsh School of Pharmacy at Cardiff University in Wales, were scheduled to be presented Tuesday at the annual meeting of the American Society for Microbiology, in Boston.

The research highlights concerns about use of the wipes in hospitals and the importance of a routine surveillance program in reducing risks of infection to patients, the researchers said.

The study used a three-step process to determine how well the wipes removed, killed and prevented the transfer of bacteria between surfaces. Several commercially available wipes for disinfection were used on surfaces contaminated with Staphylococcus aureus, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

More information

The Alliance for the Prudent Use of Antibiotics has more about antibacterial agents. -- Kevin McKeever
 
Re: Antimicrobial wipes can spread pathogens after first use

they used the wrong wripes or there just is no wipe
which kills the germs quickly enouth ?
Does it also apply to viruses ?
 
Re: Antimicrobial wipes can spread pathogens after first use

The original report isn't available to me so I'm not sure what they used. However, the wipes I've seen contain Triclosan and that leaves a residue. According to this article, some bacteria can develop a resistance to that type of antibacterial: (in this part): Do antibacterials create resistant bacteria? Here's from Sally's link:

What is an antibacterial and how are antibacterials classified?
In its broadest definition, an antibacterial is an agent that interferes with the growth and reproduction of bacteria. While antibiotics and antibacterials both attack bacteria, these terms have evolved over the years to mean two different things. Antibacterials are now most commonly described as agents used to disinfect surfaces and eliminate potentially harmful bacteria. Unlike antibiotics, they are not used as medicines for humans or animals, but are found in products such as soaps, detergents, health and skincare products and household cleaners.

What are some common antibacterials?
Antibacterials may be divided into two groups according to their speed of action and residue production: The first group contains those that act rapidly to destroy bacteria, but quickly disappear (by evaporation or breakdown) and leave no active residue behind (referred to as non-residue-producing). Examples of this type are the alcohols, chlorine, peroxides, and aldehydes. The second group consists mostly of newer compounds that leave long-acting residues on the surface to be disinfected and thus have a prolonged action (referred to as residue-producing). Common examples of this group are triclosan, triclocarban, and benzalkonium chloride. See the Table of Antibacterials.

How common are antibacterials in consumer products?
All products that claim to kill bacteria and/or viruses have some kind of antibacterial agent. Alcohols, chlorine and peroxides have been used for many decades in health-care and cleaning products. Within the past two decades, the residue-producing antibacterials (Table of Antibacterials), once used almost exclusively in health care institutions, have been added to increasing numbers of household products, particularly soaps and cleaning agents. A recent survey reported that 76% of liquid soaps from 10 states in the US contained triclosan and approximately 30% of bar soaps contained triclocarban. Many cleaning compounds contain quaternary ammonium compounds. Because these compounds have very long chemical names, they are often not easily recognized as antibacterial agents on packaging labels. More recently, triclosan has been bonded into the surface of many different products with which humans come into contact, such as plastic kitchen tools, cutting boards, highchairs, toys, bedding and other fabrics.

Is the use of antibacterial agents regulated in the US?
Whether or not an antibacterial agent is regulated depends upon its intended use and its effectiveness. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates antibacterial soaps and antibacterial substances that will either be used on the body or in processed food, including food wrappers and agents added to water involved in food processing.

If a substance is not intended for use on or in the body, it is registered by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. Substances are registered either as public health or as non-public health antimicrobial agents.

What is the difference between bacteriostats, sanitizers, disinfectants and sterilizers?
The EPA classifies public health antimicrobials as bacteriostats, sanitizers, disinfectants and sterilizers based on how effective they are in destroying microorganisms. Bacteriostats inhibit bacterial growth in inanimate environments. Sanitizers are substances that kill a certain percentage of test microorganisms in a given time span. Disinfectants destroy or irreversibly inactivate all test microorganisms, but not necessarily their spores. Sterilizers destroy all forms of bacteria, fungi, and other microorganisms and their spores.

Disinfectants can be further categorized as broad or limited spectrum agents. A broad-spectrum disinfectant destroys both gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria. A limited-spectrum disinfectant must clearly specify the specific microorganisms against which it works.

How beneficial are antibacterials?
Antibacterials are definitely effective in killing bacteria, however, there is considerable controversy surrounding their health benefits. The non-residue producing agents (Table of Antibacterials) have been used for many years and continue to be effective agents for controlling disease organisms in a wide variety of healthcare and domestic settings. When used under strict guidelines of application, the residue-producing agents have proven effective at controlling bacterial and fungal infection in clinical settings such as hospitals, nursing homes, neonatal nurseries and other health care facilities where there may be a high risk of infection.

A certain few consumer products have demonstrated effectiveness for specific conditions: antibacterial toothpaste helps control periodontal (gum) disease; antibacterial deodorants suppress odor-causing bacteria, and antidandruff shampoos help control dandruff. However, to date, there is no evidence to support claims that antibacterials provide additional health benefits when used by the general consumer.

Are antibacterial agents safe?
When used as directed for external surfaces, antibacterial agents are considered to be relatively non-toxic. However, some may cause skin and eye irritation, and all have the potential for doing harm if not stored or used properly. Furthermore, evaluations of risk are based on single agents, and do not consider the effects of multiple uses or multiple compounds. Recently, triclosan has been reported in surface waters, sewage treatment plants, the bile of fish, and breast milk, but the significance of these findings is presently unknown.

Do antibacterials create resistant bacteria?
Because of their rapid killing effect, the non-residue producing antibacterial agents are not believed to create resistant bacteria. Resistance results from long-term use at low-level concentrations, a condition that occurs when consumer use residue-producing agents such as triclosan and triclocarban. Until recently, it was accepted that these agents did not affect a specific process in bacteria, and because of this, it was unlikely that resistant bacteria could emerge. However, recent laboratory evidence indicates that triclosan inhibits a specific step in the formation of bacterial lipids involved in the cell wall structure. Additional experiments found that some bacteria can combat triclosan and other biocides with export systems that could also pump out antibiotics. It was demonstrated that these triclosan-resistant mutants were also resistant to several antibiotics, specifically chloramphenicol, ampicillin, tetracycline and ciprofloxacin.

Resistance to antibacterials has been found where these agents are used continuously (as in the hospital and food industry); however, at the present time, this modest increase in resistance has not yet created a clinical problem.

Can the widespread use of antibacterial agents lead to more resistant bacteria?
Many scientists feel that this is a potential danger, but others argue that the laboratory conditions used in the research studies do not represent the "real world." So far, studies of antibacterial use in home products such as soap, deodorant and toothpaste have not shown any detectable development of resistance. However, such products have only been in use for a relatively short period of time and studies of their effects are still extremely limited.

Are there other concerns about the use of antibacterial agents?
Yes, experts believe that the use of these agents creates a false sense of security that may cause individuals to become lax in their hygiene habits. Antibacterial use should not be considered an alternative to normal hygiene, except where normal hygiene practices are impossible.

It should always be remembered that most bacteria are harmless and in many cases, even beneficial. Very few bacteria actually cause disease. Antibacterials are not discriminating and an all-out attack on bacteria in general is unjustified. Constant use of disinfecting agents tends to disrupt the normal bacteria that act as barriers against invading pathogens. This may cause shifts in bacterial populations and create a "space" for disease-causing bacteria to enter and establish infection.

In addition, some scientists have gathered evidence showing that overly hygienic homes during early childhood may be linked to the appearance of allergies later in life. In this "hygiene hypothesis," allergies develop because the childhood immune system fails to mature properly due to lack of contact with immune-stimulating bacteria. This hypothesis remains controversial and requires further research for validation.

Are there other effective cleaning methods to prevent disease spread?
For most purposes, washing with regular soap and rinsing with running water, followed by thorough drying is still considered the most important way of preventing disease transmission (see Hand washing). This is especially important after using the toilet, changing a diaper, emptying a diaper pail, cleaning the toilet, or after handling raw meat or poultry. Several common traditional agents are effective against a wide range of disease-causing organisms. These include 70% solutions of ethyl or isopropyl alcohol, household bleach and hydrogen peroxide. Unlike triclosan and other long-acting agents, these products destroy multiple cells components at once rather than attacking a specific bacterial process.

When are antibacterials useful?
While there is no evidence that the routine use of antibacterials confer a health benefit, they are useful where the level of sanitation is critical and additional precautions need to be taken to prevent spread of disease. Thus, they are important in hospitals, day care centers and healthcare facilities and other environments with high concentrations of infectious bacteria. In the home environment, they may be needed for the nursing care of sick individuals with specific infections, or for those whose immune systems have been weakened by chronic disease, chemotherapy or transplants. Under these circumstances, antibacterials should be used according to protocol, preferably under the guidance of a health care professional.

More information about antibacterials ?
Handwashing: an effective way to stop the spread of infection ?
 
Re: Antimicrobial wipes can spread pathogens after first use

are those residue-producing antibacterials also antiviral ?

what to use for viruses ? copper-silver-spray ? just acidity ?

when bleach and alcohol dry, they are no longer effective ?
 
Re: Antimicrobial wipes can spread pathogens after first use

Here are the tables from that link:

Non-residue-producing antibacterials
Substance Group, Substance
alcohols: ethanol, isopropanol
aldehydes: glutaraldehyde, formaldehyde
halogen-releasing compounds: chlorine compounds, iodine compounds
peroxides: hydrogen peroxide, ozone, peracetic acid
gaseous substances: ethylene oxide, formaldehyde

Residue-producing antibacterials
anilides: triclocarban
biguanides: chlorhexidine, alexidine, polymeric biguanides
bisphenols: triclosan, hexachlorophene
halophenols: PCMX (p-chloro-m-xylenol)
heavy metals: silver compounds, mercury compounds
phenols and cresols: phenol, cresol
quaternary ammonium compounds: cetrimide, benzalkonium chloride, cetylpyridinium chloride
 
Re: Antimicrobial wipes can spread pathogens after first use

Here are the tables from that link:

Non-residue-producing antibacterials
Substance Group, Substance
alcohols: ethanol, isopropanol
aldehydes: glutaraldehyde, formaldehyde
halogen-releasing compounds: chlorine compounds, iodine compounds
peroxides: hydrogen peroxide, ozone, peracetic acid
gaseous substances: ethylene oxide, formaldehyde

Residue-producing antibacterials
anilides: triclocarban
biguanides: chlorhexidine, alexidine, polymeric biguanides
bisphenols: triclosan, hexachlorophene
halophenols: PCMX (p-chloro-m-xylenol)
heavy metals: silver compounds, mercury compounds
phenols and cresols: phenol, cresol
quaternary ammonium compounds: cetrimide, benzalkonium chloride, cetylpyridinium chloride
Ethanol (Ethyl alcohol) is in the hand sanitizers
 
Re: Antimicrobial wipes can spread pathogens after first use

Than, it must be first sprayed an germicide/viricide to the surface, than removing the liquid from an X m2 (only) surface with one wipe, than throwing it, I suppose.

Or maybe can be used a high temperature vapour desinfection device?

New WHO mandatory desinfection guideliness for hospitals?
 
Re: Antimicrobial wipes can spread pathogens after first use

Usually the containers for wipes/hand sanitizers advertise they kill 99.99% of germs.

My hand sanitizer claims it is *antimicrobial*. The alcohol must be at 61% (many are at 62%) to be effective.

At the soaping forum, they believed that as long as the smell of bleach remained, it was still active to some degree.
 
Re: Antimicrobial wipes can spread pathogens after first use

asn't it the other way round : when it smells then it is not so good ?

alcohol at 62% won't work, the 61% must be exact ?
 
Re: Antimicrobial wipes can spread pathogens after first use

Is there a difference between wiping, numerous times, a fomite (hard surface) and wiping skin?

With the hand gels, you're supposed to wash your hands - in effect wiping them numerous times. So if the germ under your nail is disloged, not killed immediately, and moved around to another part of your hand, transmission may be easier.

Does that make sense?

J.
 
Re: Antimicrobial wipes can spread pathogens after first use

yes, but how likely is it ?

the problem is, when you touch eyes,nose and the virus
"jumps" from the hand to infectable tissue.
At least for respiratory viruses.

Or for some bacteria maybe when you touch food and then eat it


well, flu only survives 5 min on hands we learn. (common cold 3 hours)
So hand are some sort of desinfectant for flu
 
Re: Antimicrobial wipes can spread pathogens after first use

asn't it the other way round : when it smells then it is not so good ?

alcohol at 62% won't work, the 61% must be exact ?

Bleach: I think I read that when it's in a swimming pool and it smells, then it is not so good. I don't remember exactly why.

I should have written: Alcohol needs to be at least 61% to be effective. 62% will work as well.
 
Re: Antimicrobial wipes can spread pathogens after first use

Gel-type hand sanitizers: directions to apply liberally and let dry.
Hand wipes are intended for single use.

I don't usually use the type intended to be used on surfaces. The few times I have used them, I can see why the tests came back as they did. One use for one fairly small surface might be ok.
 
Re: Antimicrobial wipes can spread pathogens after first use

from the soap forum :

Bleach is a much better disinfectant, and most dilutions. Alcohol is fairly ineffective except approaching 70%. It's disinfectant action drops off in both directions from 70%. at 50% it takes three hours to kill the same number of germs as it does in one second at 70%. It drops off sharply in the upper direction, too.

Unfortunately, if you can smell chlorine, the swimming pool hasn't got enough - strange, isn't it?! What you can smell are chloramines. These are formed when insufficient levels of free available chlorine react with ammonia and other nitrogen-containing compounds (swimmer waste, sweat, urine, etc.), resulting in their only being partially broken down (creating halomethanes).

There has been a dramatic increase in infections and infectious diseases from swimming pools over the past few years. Some strains of bacteria and viruses have built up resistance to the chlorine we use as a sanitiser in our swimming pools. Others are destroyed very slowly.
 
Re: Antimicrobial wipes can spread pathogens after first use

Alcohol is fairly ineffective except approaching 70%. It's disinfectant action drops off in both directions from 70%. at 50% it takes three hours to kill the same number of germs as it does in one second at 70%. It drops off sharply in the upper direction, too.

I saw where you questioned this. I hope he answers.
I've always heard that 15-20% (some debate) preserves
and 61% sanitizes. His statement is news to me.

At the store, I saw a sanitizer for surfaces that actually advertised that it kills viruses. The active ingredient is alkyl dimenthyl benzyl ammonium chloride.
 
Back
Top